Well it's more the presentation that is analytical than the sound signature. It puts everything up front where you can hear individual instruments and notes very easily; that is what I mean when I call the UM3X "analytical." It doesn't have what is usually thought of as an "analytical" sound, by which most people mean bright or treble-tilted, but the UM3X is definitely a very analytical sounding IEM because it almost forces you to "analyze" the music by separating every sound and placing them all very up-front, and you can really hear it when you compare it to something like the SM3, which is much more musical and natural. It's like comparing a furniture showroom (UM3X), where you "analyze" and compare the furniture, to a properly furnished living room (SM3), where you enjoy the furniture in its natural, intended environment. In this sense, the UM3X allows you to hear all sounds equally, but it really isn't natural sounding or truly realistic in its presentation, which is where the SM3 really shines, as long as you can tolerate its occasionally excessive intimacy.
I wouldn't call the UM3X's bass "boosted," personally; I think its very natural and even with the mids, despite what the graphs show. I think it has more body to it than the SM3, which has a slightly punchier bass presentation. The thing that gives the UM3X its darkness, and what some might confuse with warmth, is the dim treble. Also despite having laid back treble, the tonality of its midrange is very neutral, and less warm and lush than the SM3s; this is another factor that contributes to what I call its analytical nature, and makes it a great monitor and reference tool.
Edited by Gilly87 - 11/14/13 at 9:30am